Another Alert Question

[makiigoca]

[hv=d=s&v=e&n=s962h873dak98ca62&w=sak754hk62dqckt97&e=sthqt954dt7432c83&s=sqj83hajdj65cqj54]399|300|Scoring: IMP

South was dealer so he/she opened 1♣ with alert and explained, West said 1♠ and then came DBL from North that was alerted and explained as NEGATIVE, E said pass South 1NT and all pass. Then Player from West called me and asked me if Negative dbl can be with 3 cards in spades, i looked at the hand and said that it is aceptable but he kept complaining so i am asking for you to tell me if this was unfair of me to leave the board unadjusted or not, pls tell me what was i supposed to do. [/hv]

[hrothgar]

A negative double of a 1♠ overcall normally promises 4 Hearts.

With this said and done, sometimes you're stuck for a bid. In this case, double looks like the "smallest" lie. You need to say something, and anythig else is far worse.

 

Wthin the ACBL, minor deviations from agreements are referred to as exceptions. It is generally recognized that sometimes folks need to streach their bids.

 

I'd rule no adjustment.

[the hog]

Definitely no adjustment. What is Nth supposed to bid. The opp is only complaining because he did not like the result.

[jtfanclub]

Not a TD and therefore not answering anything, but....

 

Did they actually complain because he had three spades, or three hearts?

[McBruce]

In another thread we discussed the SAYC limit of negative doubles up to 2♠, and one responder went so far as to assert that the intent of the SAYC rulebook was that any double above 2♠ can be treated as takeout, but a NEGATIVE double promises four cards in the unbid major(s) where a mere takeout double does not.

 

I think this is reading a lot into the SAYC booklet, and in my SAYC-only tournaments I adjust against players who bid on when partner makes a double above 2♠, if passing is a logical alternative based on the assumption that the double is for penalties. I think the four-card major requirement is a very small distinction and I think that this argument tends to be made by players who are actively trying to stretch the boundaries of SAYC so they can gain an advantage on the field who will stick to the rules and not create a convenient convention, citing 'bridge logic,' where none exists.

 

The 6th edition of the Encyclopedia of Bridge says that NEGATIVE DOUBLE was in fact "the original name for a takeout double, in general use from 1915 to 1930, about which time the term INFORMATORY DOUBLE became current." The modern negative double is simply an agreement that a low-level double of an overcall by LHO of opener (formerly for penalties) is for takeout. It goes on to say that "most pairs expect [the negative doubler] to have four cards in any unbid major."

 

Most, not all. The general impression that I get from this is:

 

--'Negative' is simply another word for 'takeout,' which applies to very low level doubles of direct overcalls of the opening bid.

--If your convention card says that you play negative doubles up to a certain level, a double of a direct overcall above that level is for penalties. Playing SAYC (negative doubles up to 2♠), if you double with this hand...

 

Partner opens 1♣, RHO overcalls 3♦.

♠KJ9754 ♥T76 ♦62 ♣J2

 

...and partner bids 3♠ with this hand...

♠AQ63 ♥AJ9 ♦987 ♣K53

 

...this is strong evidence that you have a concealed partnership agreement, because opposite a penalty double of 3♦ you'd be nuts to try 3♠ on a four-card suit.

 

In the case you mention, there is no question that the double was for takeout and that South treated it as such and made a normal 1NT call. There is not enough difference between calling a double 'negative' and calling a double 'takeout' to warrant an adjustment here. It was fair of you to let the result stand.

 

If the overcall was instead 1♥ and North doubled, now we have a serious problem if South bids 1NT instead of 1♠ on the presumed 4-4 fit. This would seem to indicate a concealed understanding that such doubles do not promise four cards in a major, and an adjustment would probably be in order.

 

Hopefully the 'he kept complaining' part was not as bad as some recent behavior I have experienced... :)

[the hog]

"If the overcall was instead 1♥ and North doubled, now we have a serious problem if South bids 1NT instead of 1♠ on the presumed 4-4 fit."

 

This comment is clearly incorrect UNLESS you are playing in an Sayc tournament AND this written in stone Sayc guide states that bidding 1S here would show a 5 card S suit. (Which it does - I have checked).

 

Playing anything else -

 

Many players will bid 1S with a 4 carder and x to show cards in the minors. So the 1N bid here would be perfectly normal eg for me.

[hrothgar]

--If your convention card says that you play negative doubles up to a certain level, a double of a direct overcall above that level is for penalties.

I really don't think that this is correct.

Very few people play pure penalty doubles at any level.

 

Low level doubles are negative.

Above that, doubles are card showing.

[paulhar]

Very few people play pure penalty doubles at any level.

Correction: Very few good people play pure penalty doubles at any level.

 

I used to play in a lunchtime game at work where all doubles were for penalty! In my experience, this isn't far from the truth in any "social" game. I would expect the auction 1C (1H) P (P) Dbl to be passed out more than half the time in a social game of non duplicate players (non-BBOers too I would hope!)

[luke warm]

does sayc, as defined in whatever booklet is being used, completely forbid a player from using judgment? if, as mcb said, he would adjust the score of a pair who bid again after a double of a bid over 2S (if the pass can be made logically), that seems to limit the options of someone with, say, 19 or 20 hcp, balanced hand

 

say i'm red vs. white and i have 19 hcp.. i open 1C, lho bids 3H (preemptive) and partner doubles.. can i pass, logically? sure i can, and probably with a nice score.. but if my judgment tells me that we *might* be missing a slam if i pass, i still can't bid... even if pard's x of 3S was penalty (and it had to be in this tourney), my understanding of sayc (limited, yeah) in general and bridge as a whole tells me that all takeout doubles can be left in and all penalty doubles can be taken out... is this not allowed in sayc?

[Free]

No adjustement. This is either playing negative freebids and not knowing what a negative double is, or it's creative bidding... This isn't even a psych imoL

[the hog]

For your edification:

 

Taken from Sayc ACBL Standard Yellow Card System Booklet

Revised September, 1988

"Negative Doubles are used throught 2S"

 

Taken from the Bridge Forum International Sayc notes revised 2001

"Negative Doubles are employed through 3S [in some standard versions they are used only through 2S]. In general, negative doubles show values in the unbid suits - - most particularly the majors - - and insufficient strength and/or length to bid naturally"

 

Taken from

ACBL STANDARD YELLOW

CARD SYSTEM BOOKLET revised 2003

The negative double is used through 2♠ promising four cards (at least) in an unbid

major. Bidding a major at the two level or higher shows 11 or more points and a

five-card or longer suit.

1♣ — (1D) — Double = 4–4 or better in the majors.

1D — (1♥) — Double = exactly four spades (1♠ promises five).

1D — (1♠) — Double = four hearts and 6+ points or five hearts and 5–10 points.

 

Seems this 2S+ double being penalty is not writ in stone and there are a number of Sayc variations around.